Death by 'Due Process' - Activist courts are defying, not enforcing, the Constitution.

No, we simply adopt Adams original idea but include in the law the provision that a judge so appointed (without Senate advise and consent) can be REMOVED in X/Y/Z fashion, and then spell it out.

Recall, if you will, the original Civil Service process, the Pendleton Act, faced a federal workforce consisting of people who had Presidential appointments. The USPS, when it was set up, had several tens of thousands of Postmasters with Presidential appointments. There were procedures short of impeachment used to remove federal employees and postmasters.

Alternatively we might simply contract out federal trials to private sector firms set up for that purpose. Or, we could hire the state courts to conduct any necessary trials.

No, we simply adopt Adams original idea but include in the law the provision that a judge so appointed (without Senate advise and consent) can be REMOVED in X/Y/Z fashion, and then spell it out.

Then you're creating an Article I "tribunal" like the bankruptcy courts, the Court of Federal Claims, the U. S. Tax Court, or the U. S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces. They wouldn't have the power to adjudicate cases or controversies arising under the federal judicial power.

A similar situation arose in 1982 in the Northern Pipeline case, when the United States Supreme Court essentially struck down the entire federal bankruptcy system, because Congress had vested too much judicial power in the hands of judges who weren't lifetime appointees under Article III.

There were procedures short of impeachment used to remove federal employees and postmasters.

... who weren't explicitly guaranteed tenure of office by Article III.

Or, we could hire the state courts to conduct any necessary trials.

The Framers contemplated that most litigation arising under federal law would take place in state courts, and indeed today you can of course sue in state court on a federal cause of action. However, this idea is unrealistic because the state dockets are already jammed full.

BTW, regarding how jammed state dockets are, so are the federal ones. I found it quite useful to remind someone who owed us money that the decision we were going to make was "the final agency decision", and with that they could go to federal court.

Never, ever heard anyone shout for joy at the thought!

If we simply reduced the federal courts to a couple of judges, litigants would find the state courts, or a private substitute, adequate I am sure.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.